There is a post over on WattsUpwiththat about the use of the term climate "deniers". My 2p:
As a psychiatrist, I can confirm that telling someone who is in denial that they are in that state will almost always give offense. Depending on the intelligence and education of the patient, they will also defend their position with detailed and time consuming arguments.
In the end, even if it is agreed by all parties that the term "denier" is not politically correct, the terminology is peripheral. You call us warmists, alarmists, eco-worriers, ecofascists &c, and we use the term deniers.
The debate about terminology is peripheral. The central argument is about climatology, and in particular, whether the hypothesis that climate sensitivity for doubling of CO2 is capable of being supported by the data.
In fact, I have tried using the term sceptic, but it always felt uncomfortable, unfair to genuine sceptics.